I don't get all the resistance to putting a cop in schools

[politicat]

89. It turns schools into an arms race.

Around half of all high schools already have a resource officer, either part or full time. It does not stop violence. Having one didn't do a damned thing for Columbine and it didn't prevent any of the ones that came after.

Most college campuses -- including VaTech -- have campus police, often armed. It does not stop violence. (In the past few years, there have been almost as many shootings on college campuses as on high school and middle school campuses.)

Putting an armed cop in the halls means that when the bullets start flying, there are just more bullets. Remember the Empire State Building shooting this autumn? All of the casualties were because of "friendly fire."

Cops are expensive, so is security. We have schools that can't afford new shingles or more than one electrical outlet per class room as it is. Where do we get the money? You think this Congress will appropriate it? (Sure, jobs program for about 150K people, but expensive jobs program.) This Congress can't agree on paper or plastic.

Let's say we can figure out a robotic system, where when the cameras notice a shooter, they power up some sort of arming and aiming system -- perhaps with tranquilizer darts instead of bullets. (Because personally, I'd rather see justice done -- we have a functioning judiciary for a reason.) That's within technical capacity right now. How do we test it? Systems that aren't used often are more likely to fail when needed. (See: Hospital generators during Sandy.)

Assume the system works perfectly, every time. How do we secure it? That's the sort of technical challenge hackers love. And even better -- a remote controlled shooting, even if only with trank darts. (Which for a 5 year old, can be just as deadly.) Even better than remote controlled, it's pretty risk-free -- if a hacker can get into Sony without getting caught, they'll use the same or better tools to get into a security system.

So now we need security in depth -- fences, walls, double doors with secured access. What stops a determined shooter from calling up the principal and making some sort of plausible sounding meeting to get through the gates? All a shooter has to do is get past the first line of defense.

So place that line of defense outside of high powered range. And now, we have some sort of moating system. Is this how we want kids growing up? Inside a moat, inside walls, inside a security perimeter? With armed guards standing over them? With cameras on them all the time?

How do we get the kids to and from these fortresses? Parent drop-off? Well, the school run is every day, twice a day... so how about a car bomb? Worked for the IRA. Buses? Better buy the armored type used to transport prisoners.

A security system might be the answer -- I've seen some that only trigger from the outside -- but really, the kids will find it endlessly diverting. Math class sucks? Okay, let's pull a false alarm. So, too, will criminals -- need a diversion from a supermarket robbery? Trigger the alarm at a school. How is this conducive to a learning environment again?

Windows as points of egress are also points of ingress, and thus needs to be secured. While I would LOVE if every classroom had a garden right outside (there's so much that could be done with that) it's another point of failure. School design is not random -- it serves the greater needs of the greater number most of the time.

Assume endless funding, perfect technology, sharpshooters with perfect aim who would never accidentally hit an innocent bystander. It just means that when someone decides to end their misery and take out a lot of others in the process, they go to a mall, or a crowded street, or a movie theater. Secure all of those, and they figure out how to build a bomb or a missile.